Saskia Esken has little time, she is setting off for the Ore Mountains that day. The Willy Brandt House has recognized that we need to get out to the people more, even where the AfD is very strong. The SPD leader will later visit a supermarket and take part in a citizens’ meeting in the Postgut restaurant in Hohenstein-Ernstthal.
In the presidium they have just discussed in detail what political consequences should follow from the large number of demonstrations against right-wing extremism and thought games for expatriation and deportations. Esken only has a few minutes for her statement, but she and the SPD leadership are not lacking in ideas. But some in the Chancellor’s party are also asking themselves, is that enough? And can the relationship with CDU leader Friedrich Merz still be repaired so that we can fight together against the AfD, including agreements to reform the debt brake?
First of all, the SPD leadership wants the Democracy Promotion Act, which has been planned for a long time, to be launched with the FDP and the Greens in the traffic light coalition; it should better equip clubs and organizations that work for democracy and against extremism. What Esken still has in mind sounds like a major work program for Federal Interior Minister Nancy Faeser (SPD). We must ensure that right-wing extremist networks are exposed and their financial flows are dried up. Special departments and specialized public prosecutors’ offices should also be set up to combat hate crime.
Experienced Social Democrats admit the traffic light government’s mistakes
For organizations that are connected to the AfD, you have to look at where bans might be appropriate. In addition, disciplinary law must be applied more strictly in the public service in order to prevent right-wing extremist infiltration into judges, schools and security authorities. “We also have to take another look at gun law.”
But the more exciting debate in Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s party is taking place behind the scenes these days. Experienced social democrats in particular are talking tacheles there. It is admitted that the government’s own actions have contributed to the AfD’s strengthening and traffic light frustration. Be it the first drafts of the heating law, which citizens saw as a push into the basement, the problems with curbing migration to Germany or the cuts in agricultural diesel for farmers that were decided overnight in the Chancellery.
However, the broken promise regarding one of the big social issues of this time is criticized again and again: Scholz had promised 400,000 new apartments per year, and there should be lower rents, especially in the lower price segment, due to more supply. The goal is far from being met – and so an influential social democrat says a state housing program for 100,000 apartments is needed. The dilemma: Without suspending or easing the debt brake, there is hardly any stimulus possible that could perhaps change the mood in the country.
Merz recently called the SPD the “party of subsidized unemployment”
It’s not just the prime ministers who are demanding that Scholz take a more clear stance against the FDP and Finance Minister Christian Lindner. And again and again the debate about our own misjudgments ends up with citizens’ money. “We are proud of this citizen’s benefit law,” said Esken on Monday, countering the criticism of the amount of previous Hartz IV benefits.
When CDU leader Friedrich Merz recently called the SPD the “party of subsidized unemployment,” there was great outrage once again. But influential Social Democrats agree in personal conversations: They used to be the workers’ party, but today they care far too much about those receiving state subsidies. According to a survey by the Allensbach Institute, three quarters of the population believe that citizens’ benefit at its current level is preventing many recipients from looking for regular work. 62 percent of SPD supporters also see it that way. Since the state also covers the costs of rent and heating, citizen benefit recipients are less affected by increases in this area. Employees with low incomes in particular find the regulations unfair. The money for increasing social spending is then missing elsewhere.
In view of the major challenges for democracy and the budgetary difficulties, new special funds are also being discussed internally, for example for housing construction. But because of the falling out between Chancellor Scholz and Friedrich Merz, a new solidarity is hardly possible, even if some in the party point to the need for a “centre pact”, because when it comes to important issues such as migration or the budget, they are actually the largest opposition party also as a signal that the Democrats stand together. But right now it seems that the gaps have widened – partly through our own fault. This is also blamed on the Chancellery. Merz was very annoyed when he talked to Scholz in the fall about an alliance to limit migration in the Chancellery and at the same time the head of the Chancellery, Wolfgang Schmidt, held a meeting with journalists in which he made it clear that Merz was not needed to solve these questions anyway, just the federal states. And the fact that Esken said at the SPD party conference in December that the Union was agitating against the traffic lights “in chorus with the AfD” also left him bitter.
The feeling has spread in the Union that Scholz and the SPD are not being taken seriously and that their comrades are constantly cheating. They participated in the special fund for the Bundeswehr, and now, contrary to the agreements, it is not only being used for new material, but also to plug budget holes. Under no circumstances do Merz and CSU leader Markus Söder want to temporarily enter into a grand coalition if the traffic lights break, then there would have to be new elections. SPD leader Esken insists that the tablecloth with the Union has not yet been completely cut. “Even if we discuss and argue controversially about the matter,” she says, “our channels of discussion are open at all times.”